Appeal No. 1997-2046 Page 17
Application No. 08/059,350
The examiner fails to show a suggestion of the
limitations in the prior art. Although Soohoo teaches a
saturation magnetization of "about 10 gauss," p. 1803, the4
saturation magnetization is not a property of a ferromagnetic
layer of a planar inductor. To the contrary, it is a property
of a magnetic core as an anisotropic Permalloy film. Id. His
broad, conclusory opinion that "saturation magnetization ...
[is] dictated by design requirements," (Examiner's Answer at
8), does not meet the requirement for actual evidence of
obviousness.
For its part, although Yoshizawa teaches a height of 18
Fm," p. 34, the height is not a property of a ferromagnetic
layer of a planar inductor. To the contrary, it is a property
of a toroidal wound core. Id.
Because Soohoo only teaches a saturation magnetization of
a magnetic core and Yoshizawa only teaches a toroidal wound
core, we are not persuaded that teachings from the prior art
would have suggested the limitations of "[a] planar inductor
having an inductance, comprising: at least one ferromagnetic
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007